Data centre planning in England could be reshaped by a proposed 100MW threshold and a new national policy framework published on Wednesday 28 October 2026. Ministers have opened a consultation on a draft National Policy Statement (NPS) for large data centres, with responses invited until 8 January 2027.
The document would guide the Secretary of State when deciding data centre projects brought into the nationally significant infrastructure project (NSIP) consenting system. It is a draft policy, not a new planning permission for any project, and not an automatic transfer of every data centre application away from councils.
For developers, authorities and communities, the significant details are an indicative test based on IT equipment load, a proposed presumption of consent outside the Green Belt, and detailed requirements on electricity, water, efficiency and local benefits. Those qualifications matter just as much as the ambition to accelerate investment.
How 100MW changes data centre planning
The 94-page draft NPS suggests that projects with at least 100 megawatts of rated IT load capacity are likely to be considered nationally significant and suitable for direction under section 35 of the Planning Act 2008. Rated IT load is the maximum electrical power available for the computing equipment, not the facility’s total electricity demand including cooling.
That figure is an indicative minimum rather than an automatic switch into the NSIP regime. Each application for a direction still requires the Secretary of State to consider national significance on its merits. Exceptional schemes below 100MW may qualify, but would need detailed reasons. Most smaller projects would normally remain within the Town and Country Planning Act route.
Data centres have already been eligible for section 35 directions since SI 2026/13 took effect on 8 January 2026. The made instrument adds data centres to the categories of business or commercial projects eligible to request a direction. This consultation does not establish those powers. It sets out proposed policy for how the route would operate. Our guide to National Policy Statements explains why national policy guides later infrastructure decisions but cannot itself authorise construction.
The distinction is essential to data centre planning because a proposal with 100MW of total demand may have substantially less than 100MW of rated IT load. Promoters should make that measurement clear rather than treating a marketing figure as a statutory threshold.
A presumption of consent with important exceptions
Paragraph 81 of the Government’s draft NPS says the Secretary of State should start with a presumption of consent
when deciding applications in accordance with the eventual policy, subject to section 104 of the Planning Act 2008. The proposed data centre planning framework therefore gives weight to national need, but remains within the statutory decision-making structure. Applicants would still have to satisfy relevant requirements, apply the environmental mitigation hierarchy and meet other legal duties.
That is not automatic approval. The document identifies unresolved harm to protected habitats, unacceptable effects on public safety, flooding and coastal erosion as possible reasons for refusing development consent. The most explicit exception is the Green Belt: the draft presumption does not apply there.
A Green Belt site must still be assessed against national Green Belt policy. Where development is inappropriate, very special circumstances would remain necessary and harm to openness would attract substantial weight. The national case for more computing capacity would not simply cancel site-specific planning constraints.
Power and water become central planning evidence
An electricity connection is a major delivery challenge. The draft expects data centre planning submissions to demonstrate early engagement with network operators and a credible power strategy. A secured grid connection is not an absolute precondition for submitting an application, but proceeding without one would be at the applicant’s risk.
The Secretary of State would examine the likelihood of an eventual connection and give positive weight to credible delivery or reduced grid demand through renewable and low-carbon energy. Electricity price impacts, supply security and the environmental consequences of any associated generation must also be considered.
The design criteria propose Power Usage Effectiveness (PUE) of 1.3 or better. PUE compares all electricity consumed at a site with the amount used by its IT equipment. It is a measure of overhead efficiency, not a guarantee of low absolute energy demand. Developers would have to explain why less efficient designs were chosen.
Water supply, cooling choices, peak-day demand, waste heat reuse, noise, air pollution from backup generators, traffic and cumulative impacts also feature prominently. The draft expects applicants to disclose predicted annual and peak-day water use and investigate how their heat could serve nearby premises. Water scarcity and the effect on households are genuine material considerations, not questions solved by promising efficient technology.
The government separately proposes a tightly controlled approach to temporary behind-the-meter generation for exceptionally strategic data centres. That framework is still being prepared. It would be wrong to assume any applicant could run permanent off-grid generation simply because grid access is delayed.
Biodiversity and Green Belt remain material
The draft refers to a 10% biodiversity net gain requirement for qualifying NSIP applications submitted from 2 November 2026, under the relevant biodiversity gain statement. The document says the statement will be incorporated into the NPS before designation.
That must be distinguished from the separate Budget announcement proposing future relief from biodiversity net gain for qualifying small brownfield residential schemes. A housing policy proposal is not an exemption for data centres, and a national consent route does not remove the need to assess protected habitats and other environmental effects.
Consequently, the proposed data centre planning tests combine national need with careful consideration of flood risk, heritage, protected species, landscape, Green Belt and high-quality agricultural land. It is a mistake to describe this as infrastructure being permitted regardless of its surroundings.
The separate Data Centre Covenant
On the same day, the Treasury published a Data Centre Covenant setting expectations on fair electricity-system costs, investment in communities, environmental standards, skilled jobs and national security. The government estimates a need for 6GW of AI data centre capacity by 2030.
The Covenant calls for strategic projects to agree a Local Benefit Plan developed with host communities. It envisages a new ministerial route to accelerate planning and power connections for projects judged sufficiently important. The definition of those strategic projects, and the further selection criteria, are still to come.
This policy expectation is not the same as a legally enforceable section 106 obligation or a charge under the Community Infrastructure Levy. The planning tests and any future financial commitments need to be kept distinct. Councils and developers will need clarity about how promised benefits are funded, delivered and secured.
Consultation and parliamentary dates
The consultation closes at 11.59pm on 8 January 2027. The draft records a parliamentary scrutiny period from 28 October 2026 to 17 February 2027. A further formal step is required before the NPS can be designated and take effect. Until then, the new proposed decision-making tests should not be reported as settled statutory national policy.
The proposals principally concern England. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland retain their devolved planning arrangements. The document may be relevant background for their decisions, but does not give the English Secretary of State authority to determine data centre applications in those nations. Scotland also has a separate mandatory environmental assessment direction for specified data centre projects above 50MW, which uses a different test.
For data centre planning specialists, the immediate questions are whether a project meets the rated IT load measure, whether a section 35 direction would be appropriate and whether the grid, water and environmental evidence is robust enough to sustain a national examination. Communities should concentrate on local impact reports and the Green Belt exception, rather than assuming a national framework removes their ability to participate.
I would judge the new framework by whether its promises of investment and national digital resilience are matched by convincing evidence on the ground. A credible connection agreement, realistic water figures and enforceable mitigation are considerably more valuable than optimistic project headlines.
Original sources: draft NPS PDF, consultation instructions, sustainability and habitats reports and the Data Centre Covenant.
0 Comments